Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!world!eff!mnemonic
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Is information property ? (was: Re: EFF amicus brief in U.S. v. Riggs)
Message-ID: <1991May27.131121.3589@eff.org>
Date: 27 May 91 13:11:21 GMT
References: <1991May26.123647.1059@nntp.hut.fi> <1991May26.185915.21605@eff.org> <1991May27.065841.6280@ddsw1.MCS.COM>
Organization: The Electronic Frontier Foundation
Lines: 25

In article <1991May27.065841.6280@ddsw1.MCS.COM> learn@ddsw1.MCS.COM (William Vajk) writes:
>In article <1991May26.185915.21605@eff.org> Mike Godwin writes:
>
>>In general, what we call "intellectual property" is not dealt with
>>under the general theft statutes, but is protected by specific
>>provisions of the Copyright and Patent statutes.
>
>One notable current exception seems to be trhe Len Rose case.

It is worth noting that Len pled guilty to wire fraud. Unlike
the Interstate Transportation of Stolen Property statute, wire
fraud does not actually require a theft of tangible property.



--Mike




-- 
Mike Godwin,        |         To see a world in a grain of sand
mnemonic@eff.org    |         And heaven in a wild flower
(617) 864-0665      |         Hold infinity in the palm of your hand
EFF, Cambridge, MA  |         And eternity in an hour